An argument that capable young programmers should take startups more seriously, because the upside is high, failure is survivable, and many common objections are weaker than they seem.
Starting a startup beats a cubicle job for capable hackers, even when it fails
Most reasons people avoid startups are weak
2 / 20
Y Combinator's first 2005 batch
50%
success rate, 0% terrible experiences
3 / 20
Kiko failed after a year, sold on eBay for $250,000
Its founders started Justin.TV
4 / 20
Y Combinator would feel safe aiming for a 25% success rate, above the quoted 10% figure
5 / 20
People hesitate because several mixed reasons blur together
Reluctance should be analyzed as a checklist
6 / 20
You are old enough to start a startup once you respond to challenges like an adult
7 / 20
If you are too inexperienced to start a startup, starting one is the fastest cure
8 / 20
Determination is probably the best predictor of success
Many hackers underestimate their own
9 / 20
If you worry you are not smart enough, you probably are
Most startups need effort more than brilliance
10 / 20
You do not need business knowledge at first
Making something people want matters most
11 / 20
Investors strongly prefer cofounders. Lacking one is important enough to move or change ideas
12 / 20
70%
of the average Y Combinator idea changes in three months
Initial ideas matter less than founders
13 / 20
The best source of startup ideas is a real need in your own life, even if it seems narrow
14 / 20
There is no fixed limit to startups
Human wants keep expanding and markets adapt to absorb value
15 / 20
If you have a family, a consulting business or early startup job lowers risk more than founding
16 / 20
Startup failure carries little stigma in America
Big company managers preferred failed founders over big company employees
17 / 20
The strongest startup founders are often uncertain hackers, not gung-ho business types
18 / 20
A regular job is a powerful default, but startups may mark a historic shift in wealth creation